SlimeVirgin is opposing it, and went to the trouble to move the RFA page to ensure everyone knew he has applied thrice before. Otherwise, it's running pretty strongly in support.

Werdna is clearly going to get adminship unless something drastic comes up. The current objections are pretty minor.

From his user page:


Well, there you go! He's the ideal Wikipedian... how could he lose?

Lemmegethistraitnabot asks:

So then he believes in the right of Daniel Brandt to remain anonymous?

Werdnabot responds by emitting mass quanta of Blue Smoke (BS) ...

Jonny

By far Wikipedia could do much worse. You are always calling for more automation in Wikipedia, Werdna is one of the few people with the know how to do so.

So, who knows, I'd say Werdna isn't a bad choice at all. Wikipedia could do a lot worse.

That reminds me, maybe I should go support.....

Well, don't get me wrong - I'm sure he's a very nice guy, and he's clearly a fine programmer too. I'm just wondering, if his user page said something like, "I'm a liberal humanist who believes that everyone on Wikipedia should identify themselves with their real names, for genuine accountability within the larger context of civilized culture," would they even let him run those bots in the first place?

Still, I'd probably vote for him, if only because the people supporting him seem like OK people. (Except for Cyde, of course!)

It's not a consensus unless SV says it is.

Actually, I think that Wikipedia should delete the article and get on with life. Some people have a more combative attitude towards it...

Werdna

And David Gerard is a great guy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=103817525

What do you think is in the way of them complying with DB's request?

Jonny

The Cabal is completely split, which may have implications far beyond one RfA. In support are Dmcdevit, David Gerard and Ryulong. Against are SV, Jayjg and our old friend and wannabe Cabalist Grace Note.

Just for the record, I actually do think Dave Gerard is a reasonably decent sort of person, and that he doesn't deliberately intend to harm people, generally speaking. It's just that he's pretty much always wrong about everything, and will never, ever admit it.

Werdnabot is really useful. SV said like "great botwork doesn't make a great admin" or the like.

Malber I think complained abouy talk comment erasing.

Diablo or someone complained that Werdna tried to get an article speedily deleted when it was notable and the article went to AFD and got a clear keep.

He does sometimes; he unblocked Poetlister.


Mailer Diablo isn't Cabal, is he?

Charles Matthews unblocked Poetlister... There's an edit summary stating he "discussed" it with Dave via e-mail first, but AFAIK there has never been any public admission by Dave that he made a mistake, and certainly nothing like an apology. I personally believe Dave is one of those people who is pathologically incapable of admitting to, or apologizing for, anything - at least not sincerely - which makes him the perfect WP press spokesman, when you think about it!

Is Jayjg a sockpoodle of SlimVirgin's? It seems like lately he's about two minutes behind her with a rubber stamp.

Hmm... Werdna, you probably shouldn't have reminded them that you have an account here! Not that you've ever said much of anything critical of WP, but there were 17 oppose votes prior to that over a 40-hour period, and now 13 more since then over a 32-hour period.

I could change the account name, or even erase some stuff if you think that would help... Banning you wouldn't do much good though, since they'd just assume we did it to help you out, and that would probably just make matters worse!

Feel free to plead the Fifth Dementment to the HiveMind Destitution, if you wish.

Jonny

I just think they're in cahoots. When Slimey wants something done with plausible deniability, she emails Jayjg, and he does it, and to some degree vice-versa. So Jayjg helpfully protects articles that Slim is edit-warring over, and indef blocks anyone who dares to stand up to her, if it would look untoward for her to do it herself. She accuses anyone arguing with Jayjg of incivility and trolling, and scares them away. This has been going on for last least 9 months.

Quite right, and Guy should have known that. I e-mailed David Gerard twice, offering to phone him or even visit him to prove I was who I said I was, but he never responded.

Hmm, things aren't looking much better for Mr. Werdna. One of the new (I think) ArbCom members, User:Blnguyen, practically wrote a whole novel in opposition, and looking at what another admin (User:TShilo12) wrote, you'd almost think Werdna had barged into the guy's house and gunned down his whole family with a bazooka. And he was supposed to be so uncontroversial!

Or is this just the inevitable internecine conflict effect? You know, when all the real dissenters are gone, they start turning on their own, that sort of thing...?

Sorry Werdna... At the moment it's 150/60/8 (and why do people even bother casting neutral votes, anyway?), so I guess you could still eek by, but unless you can program a bot to get people to stop bad-mouthing you for every little past misdeed you might ever have conceivably done, it looks like it's back to the stables...?

Well, that's still 71% if my math is right. I am tempted to send my sock army in to vote for him, but I realized I don't know whether he ought to be an admin -- I mean, in the real world. Clearly in the Wiki-verse he deserves it (IMHO), and the cabal is opposing him because he knows too much.

But what is the sense here?

Well, I still think he's OK, relatively speaking. Besides, he's young, he's Australian, he's a coder... what are they expecting, Mahatma Gandhi?

And let's face it, some of these quotes and/or diff-links thoughtfully provided at such great length by Mr. Blnguyen are somewhat, shall we say, clipped. For example, during Mailer Diablo's RfB, Werdna seems to have written the following:

If you guessed that the three words extracted by Blnguyen from this quote were "temperament," "trustworthiness" and "ability," well, you'd be just a tad off, I'm afraid!

Werdna also wrote this on the Talk page for WP:RfA one fine day:

Guess which three words were extracted this time?

And here, guess which single word was pulled by Blnguyen from this quote, from Werdna's return-from-wikibreak announcement a few months back:

OMFG! Nastiness on Wikipedia? Why, this cannot be!

And last but not least, "History of the board game Monopoly" really is a pretty retarded article title. I mean, seriously... Somebody has to deal with these things, right? And who shall, if not Werdna?

Personally, I'll bet SlimVirgin hasn't played Monopoly once in her entire life. I mean, that might mean actually having some light-hearted fun, right?

I suppose it will come down to the judgment of the closing bureaucrat. Maybe it will be Raul654.

SV's had a bad time on RfA lately: several people she's supported failed to pass, and of course Ryulong only passed on the judgment of the closing bureaucrat. She's obviously keen to show that at least she can stop people she doesn't like passing RfA. I'd urge Gomi to support.

I have a feeling that it's gonna pass in any case...

The notion that these all were ever aligned is silly. Slim 'n' friends have never been chummy with the club containing Kelly Martin, David Gerard, and others (the foundation club). In fact, Slim was running a bit low on well-placed friends before she made the politically brilliant move of allying with Geogre et. al. in the FAC vs. IRC deathmatch. Now, though, the Slim group has linked up with the Geogre/Bishonen/Raul654 group to control a big chunk of arbcom and exercise near-veto power on RfA. And it looks like Werdna just got vetoed.

SV is certainly not chummy now with KM, opposing in the last ArbCom elections. However, she approached KM in the "Poetlister" case to get CheckUser evidence to block her. (Have I got that one right, PL?)

Of course it'll pass, whether it's 60% support, or 99, when we have bureaucrats like Raul654 who like to promote out of process! I'd like to hope my oppose is actually considered by the 'crat when it is closed... As already noted on the RfA talk page, it'll probably be controversial.

Only if he likes Werdna.

I'm no good at direct links but scroll down to "Werdna's RfA"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...pedia_a_joke.3F

What's going on there?

See this

Looks like it could be the "real" reason Werdna's getting so many "oppose" votes.

ED has been known to falsify logs and screen shots before, including one a while back that had my WR member name on it. Supposedly they do it just for comic effect, but it does tend to damage their credibility somewhat!

Presumably there are other reasons for the oppose votes, of course, including Werdna's "Sysop Accountability Proposal" back in December. The current group of admins generally don't like to hear words like "accountability" - it upsets them, and often spoils their breakfast.

But when you get right down to it, there's a LOT of anti-IRC sentiment going around WP right about now, and Werdna is closely associated with the "IRC crowd," for better or worse...

Werdna should just do what the smart people do: Create a clean account specifically for getting adminship and then you don't have to deal with all this baggage and bad blood. Too much WikiDrama in this RfA nomination and not enough efficiency and intelligence.

Indeed. He could probably write a bot clever enough to run up 5,000 edits without looking like a bot.

Failed - final total was 181/89/12, or 67.0%, clearly not a pass.

So the moral is - if SV supports you on RfA, you'll fail (unless Raul654 closes); if she opposes you, you'll fail!

Hmm... Important safety tip: If you're going to put up an RfA, it's best to wait until just the right moment - i.e., just after Slimmy goes on vacation.

Except that she never takes vacations...

Funny! The moral of the story is then clear: avoid SlimVirgin and other similarly toxic people at all costs, unless you are simply looking for drama to spice up your life.

I think that's spelled dramamine.

Jonny

I've got to be honest, that IRC log scared the hell out of me and was behind about 50% of my motivation for opposing. I'm conscious of the possibility of falsification, but a couple other people were vouching for the accuracy of it and I couldn't find a denial from Werdna anywhere. A while after I voted, the question conveniently disappeared, making it seem even worse.

Where can I read this log?

Keep up, Lamont! The link (to ED, natch) is on Post #31 of this thread...

Anyhoo, if others had the same reaction as Everyking to the removal of the link on WP, then that's yet another example of how User:Cyde has once again somehow managed to unintentionally make things worse for one of his friends and/or allies by, you know, just getting involved. Something ought to be done about that boy!

The logs don't have timestamps and the back and forth between Blu Aardvark appears like someone staged the incident.

I wouldn't put it past them, of course... but just a vague suspicion that they might be accurate is usually enough for many of the WP'ers involved.

And it's probably damned if you do, damned if you don't from Werdna's perspective - even if they are fraudulent logs, it's probably impossible to prove, and it would just draw more unwanted negative attention...

I guess the problem with all this is that 17-year-olds are right about at the age where they start to appreciate the need for things like moral qualms, ethical responsibility, personal discretion/propriety, and so on. So if you get into Wikis at age 14 or 15, you're more likely to do some stuff that will prejudice people against you right about at the time when you're ready for your second RfA, even though at that point you're probably too old for that kind of activity. And it all probably seems really unfair, and makes you all anti-social and stuff.

I'm not sure what my own excuse is, though...

I wouldn't (and couldn't) expect him to prove it's false, just to credibly deny it. I still wouldn't have supported him, but I probably would have abstained from voting.